Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
The appellant was granted bail in the Excise Policy case due to prolonged incarceration and denial of the right to speedy trial, despite the seriousness of the allegations. The Supreme Court observed that the trial was unlikely to conclude anytime soon, given the voluminous evidence and witnesses involved. Keeping the appellant incarcerated indefinitely would violate their fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The court noted the appellant's deep societal roots and imposed conditions like furnishing bail bonds to address concerns about tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The High Court's order denying bail was quashed, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,00,000 with two sureties of the same amount.
The appellant was granted bail in the Excise Policy case due to prolonged incarceration and denial of the right to speedy trial, despite the seriousness of the allegations. The Supreme Court observed that the trial was unlikely to conclude anytime soon, given the voluminous evidence and witnesses involved. Keeping the appellant incarcerated indefinitely would violate their fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The court noted the appellant's deep societal roots and imposed conditions like furnishing bail bonds to address concerns about tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The High Court's order denying bail was quashed, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,00,000 with two sureties of the same amount.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
